RNP $4,000 CASA Rip-Off?
 

It appears that my Citation, MIF (in Australia since 2006), has to get some new RNP approval. I have had a pilot working on getting the information ready – having taken about three weeks – and I have now just paid CASA $2,040 for their estimate of what they have to do on their paperwork!

It appears the cost to me will be a little over $4,000 (including paying my pilot), however there is no change in the aircraft at all – ZERO - so no resultant change to the level of safety.

Can someone advise what happens with this $4,000 and why this has suddenly become necessary?

I have spoken to my American friends and they know nothing about what it might be.

It's how 'user pays' works in a monopoly, Dick.

The users get used.

Dick, if I were you I'd be registering my aircraft in the US. Things won't change in this country til CAsA have destroyed this industry.

They know you're good for it.

They are probably chuckling down at the pub about it now lighting up some nice Cubans with dickheads and downing a grange. I heard the '08 is pretty fantastic. You probably already know.

Welcome to user pays :)

As a proud and decorated Australian identity, Dick shouldn't have to resort to pragmatic options in aircraft registration. I personally would have no problem with registering my new Citation in NZ nor employing a FAA certified pilot to fly it, but honestly, would anyone here leave it alone and not attack him if he did so?


But then again....maybe there is a point to bring it to the notice of bloody stupid apathetic public how bad things have become. But would you lot leave him alone?







Thought so....

Yes I understand user pays. It was introduced after the Henry Bosch report about 1988.

It normally means you have to actually have to be a "user " of some service.

So what's this all about? Will I have to do the same with my IFR helicopter and IFR Caravan?

More importantly will every IFR aircraft owner in Australia have to pay a similar amount for every aircraft ?

Has a RIS be undertaken? Or is this irrellevent ?

Yes I can afford the cost but I am concerned about the industry I have always supported.

If I ever own an aircraft, it'll be M registration for me! ;)

Did you ask CASA, before you handed over $2,040 without knowing what for?

Dick,
mate, $4,000 is cheap!!

How about $6,000 and eighteen months for RVSM approval, aside from the fact the aircraft left the factory RVSM approved and flew all the way to OZ through RVSM airspace and Thats not counting the eighteen months of flying about at FL280 pumping vast amounts of carbon into our atmosphere.

Something seems to happen as soon as that VH is painted on an airframe.

Or how bout a hundred grand and twelve months to put an aircraft similar to your CJ on an AOC.
Imagine where our mining industry, which is about the only thing keeping this country afloat at the moment, would be if they had to pay that every time they wanted to introduce a new ore carrier into their fleet? (All in the name of safety of course)

CAsA put out a cost benefit analysis on what part 61 will cost the industry...
These people must be living in LA LA land if they think thats even close to the true cost.

There is a very informative narrative on CAsA's web sight where they use an imagined operator loosely based on the now defunct Brindabella to illustrate how a company should introduce a safety management system. It illustrates just how completely out of touch CAsA is with the industry they embugger.
This mythical company employs a myriad of people at management level to administer a few piston twins and a couple of turbines.

If Brindabella operated like that in reality its no wonder they went broke.

You can charter and aircraft in the USA for about a third of the price for the same aircraft here.

Why?

They don't have user pays.

Their airports are public utilities, utilised in the public interest for aviation, not as a cash cow for loan sharks and property developers to milk industry and the public alike of billions of dollars on which they pay no Tax.

They have a regulator who has "Foster and promote" in their charter.

Their regulations are not in the criminal code, are written in plain language and unlike here actually work to improve safety.

The FAA is by and large not corrupt unlike our regulator.

Hold on, wait wait wait....are you saying Dick, that you have had to shell out unnecessary money for your private jet, and may very well have to do so for your 2 other very expensive aircraft?

If only my problems were so horrific.

How about a hundred and twenty grand on myriad qualifications and endorsements, and you can't get a job unless its to work for free?

5050, Dick has made it perfectly clear that he can afford to pay the fee however he is amazed at the cost considering that nothing on the actual actual aircraft changes.

Your $$,000's for your CPL is different because you actually got something for your money; a world recognized pilot qualification.

Dick, think outside the box mate. Charges such as the one you mentioned will help to fund CASA's regulatory reform program for another 25 years! Think of all the jobs that are being created.......stop being so negative ok.

CASA is charging for swapping from GPSRNAV to RNP2?

I agree with Dick. We have experienced the same with our private jet. Not only do we have to pay CAsA the $2000+ estimate to have our aircraft 'approved' when nothing has changed on the aircraft, we also have to spend our time and effort educating CAsA as to why our aircraft should be approved. Some of the questions we have been asked that should already be known by the regulator or questions they ask which they already have the access to documents that contain the answer for them, is something I find frustrating. There seems to be little value in the $140 per hour that we pay CAsA not to read our documents.

Do I sense a highly successful monopolistic business plan?

$300 million and 26 years of regulatory reform, still far from finished, intended to generate perpetual income for services that are of no benefit to it's captive "clients"?

$140 per hour for a CASA FOI, theoretical gross annual income $241,920? I'm yet to find a CASA FOI that could earn one third of that as a commercial pilot.

I agree with Dick. His aircraft came from the manufacturer RNP certified - it doesn't get better than that. He wasted $4,000 for what gain or safety benefit?

Whether or not he can personally afford to waste that amount of money is entirely and totally irrelevant.

5050:

Fifty, the reason you can't get a job is that there aren't enough aircraft in Australia - for the very reasons Dick is complaining about.

The reason it cost you a hundred and Twenty grand is exactly the same....CASA is a leach on the entire Aviation industry it claims to regulate.

You should be supporting Dick.

Sunny I wholeheartedly agree.

We are rapidly approaching the end game.

Part 61 was just the beginning of the perfect storm about to engulf the industry.

Need examples? the very regulations CAsA used as their model has killed GA in Europe. Why do we imagine the same result would not occur here?

Dick,

Are you going to the AAHOF event this year? If so, I'll seek you out and give you another ripping example of how their 'creative charging' regime hurts us (not an aircraft operator). It just defies logic and all sensible business practice. The reasons they give for the costs we pay each year is just as priceless.

Snail.

Wonder why a new imported car is far more expensive in Australia than most other countries?

Because, I'm told, the Australian authorities again crash test examples, despite being crash tested and approved/certified in their country of manufacture. And the Australian authorities purportedly test to the same international safety standards.

Bit like the horrific expense around the old DCA "First of Type" aircraft certification of years gone by. It was a junket of incredible proportions, first class air travel, weeks overseas at the aircraft factory, lavish wining and dining, all to reach a similar Australian certification conclusion (plus a few expensive modifications required to justify the junket) as the original aircraft manufacturer and the regulator in the country of manufacture.

Australian Governments repetitiously continues to reinvented the wheel.

Taily how very true,

The mantra pervades all regulatory bureaucratic institutions in Australia.

All the rest of the world is wrong, we are right!